Comments by "Xyz Same" (@xyzsame4081) on "Brian Tyler Cohen"
channel.
-
21
-
@mechanicgray They were not standing so close that they could hardly move at the BLM events. And they wore masks even though they were outdoors and had some distance. - as opposed to the rioters pushed against an open entrance to the Capitol while standing VERY close for longer time. Trying for force police out of the way (those officers had shields, armor, and occasionally used batons and tear gas. Not excessively, more to make the insurgents back up. Eventually police prevailed, either the rioters gave up or police got backup).
All of them shouted at lot - so if there was one infected (must have been, lots of people) I guess a lot of others were infected, too. We will know in a few days. They were outdoors, but that does not help if they stay longer in the same place, that close and yell all the time.
at one point they caught a police officer pushing him against an obstacle. He screamed in pain, no one could move, eventually he got himself out of the confinement and behind safe lines of fellow officers. According to updates he did not sustain severe injuries.
12
-
7
-
5
-
3
-
3
-
Good debate skills. The fish - not the fisher - has to find the bait attractive / convincing ! * - Do not preach to the choire, find arguments that tap into what is important for the other side. Ted Cruz wants Biden to get heat from HIS supporters. And Biden voters are positive about unions.
* So: M4A is not only fair and compassionate (R voters do not care beyond family, friends and "people like us"), it is also much more cost efficient and undermines for- profit monopolies. These would be the arguments to stress now - the D base is also convinced about the advantages of M4A anyway.
Trump is a racist, xenophobe, hypocrite, look how he routinely treats women .... R voters obviously do not care. But for the value system of politically right persons "loyalty" and "keeping promises" is important. Trump gave Dems plenty to work with (and they foolishly ranted on and on what is important to the D base). So Trump had to self-eliminate - the Biden campaign did little to WIN the race. Trump did them the favor to screw up. Big, big time. (bigly !)
So the feckless Dems should have attacked Trump on loyalty to alienate some of his base with those arguments. Instead of virtue signalling to their own base.
R voters have known Ted Cruz for the longest time, so they obviously do not care - Beto should have taken a page out of the Republican textbook and should have hammered him on things that count with the R voters: letting his wife be insulted by Trump, his father was smeared by Trump too. (family, loyalty, being a courageous principled man).
Sure potential D voters find much morse things to object to with Ted Cruz. it does not matter they needed very little arguments to vote for Beto in 2018 - you have to work with the arguments that matter to the people on the fence.
Republican voters deny or downplay Climate change and do not care about the damages of those pipelines (which will invariably leak. There is a reason they try not to cross areas where middle class people live nearby. the soccer mums would raise hell if it would poison THEIR children). Ted Cruz does not have to convince Republican voters to be PRO pipelines and pro fossil fuel industry.
He wants Biden to get pressure from the D leaning voters - people hear jobs and stop thinking. And UNION jobs are important for the other side. So Ted Cruz all of a suddden poses as the defender of union jobs.
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
Else ID that has expired (passport) or a very old driver's licence will be fine. They want to have some proof of identity for in person voting, but they keep the bar low, and remove it in some cases. Almost everyone got a passport or driver's licence ONCE in their life.
If they lived a very secluded life (at a farm, stay at home (farm) wife, never learned to drive a car, that's the job of the spouse only one car in the family, or they take the bus - that person would very likely vote in a rural place, so no ID needed.
Just in case her or his life get's exciting and they ever need a passport. It would not be hard to get one. That is easy in every respect and they apply for it in their small village - but that can become a MAJOR HASSLE in the U.S.
If a person ever loses all their documents (homeless, moving, burning down or floods) - they need to know where their parents lived when they were born, and / or the hospital where they were born. THAT would be enough, to start the project to get a birth certificate, and certificate of nationality - and every other documentation is based on that.
It can be done from abroad (expats if they need legal copies, but that costs some money). In Europe one would need to return to the place of birth maybe, but the countries are not that large (Germany the largest European nation has 83 million people, and the U.S. has 330 millions. But the area of the U.S. is even larger, so travel distances are MUCH longer, never mind the territories like Puerto Rico, Samoa. Or remote states like Hawaii, or Alaska, or Maine).
And if you have only lost ONE document in another country, you can get a new one at every civil service IN the country. Only birth certificate would be more "burdensome", either in person OR the slightly higher bar to do the "expat" route via mail.
2
-
Getting civil services and the crucial birth certificate in the U.S. can be a MAJOR HASSLE. See voterider website or the reporting when Nevada demanded "Real ID" a few years ago (not only voting, to enter federal buildings, or travel by plance domestically).
1) underfunded offices of civil services, none in remote, rural areas (or open hours do not accomodate working people, or those w/o cars).
DMV is used as example of government inefficiency and bureaucraZy.
No - they can issue driver's licence and passports just fine in other countries, but you have set up the civil administration in a REASONABLE manner.
In other nations: 10 to max ! 20 minutes drive will get you to civil services, public transportation to those "central" places (often a village of 1000 souls in a rural area), and one long afternoon per week. Waiting lines are unheard of. In the rural or metropolitan areas.
Their driver's licences are issued ONCE in a lifetime, and stay valid. They count as "legal" domestic proof of identity.
2) inconsistent and kinda slopppy way to issue documents in the U.S. - at least in past decades. Some states are super pesky to issue a driver's licence. One man wanted to move back to the state where he was born in 2016, and tried to get a driver's licence from his future state, and tried to register to vote for the upcoming Nr. 2016 election.
There was a small (insignificant difference) in the birth certificate compared to SS data and the still valid driver's licence from his current state. I seem to remember it was the middle name (that is a very common thing that trips up people).
Two in person visits (he had to travel by plane), he brought his school and vaccination records as demanded (to prove he was who he claimed to be !) - and STILL it was not enough to cure a mistake that civil servants in one of the states or HIS state of birth had made in the past.
What are the odds that he used the documents of someone else ? Or forged some documentation ? After the second in person visit, he returned to his current state of residency, got whatever new & additional "proof of identity" they invented (that was AFTER the school report cards and vaccination cards), then called them and asked if he could send it by mail, and if they would process his voter registration (I guess he would have picked up the driver's licence later, you can drive for a while in your new state of residency).
They refused: Only IN person (voter registration). I guess the civil servants are afraid to lose their job, because if the Republican politicians stir up hysteria about alleged voter fraud, and got to such lenghts to deny that a veteran ID is a proper ID to vote - they mean business and would fire a civil servant that is not executing the pesky and burdensome laws to the last semi colon.
So the civil servants do not dare to apply common sense, they give the citizen a hard time.
That man was black (of course) and the super petty state was in the South (of course).
2
-
2
-
Some states accept ID of active military personell, but NOT the ID of a veteran as proper ID for voting. What are the odds a person would use a stolen or forged ID of a veteran ? When they already met the burden to register once (with a birth certificate, which they also would have to forge, never mind matching that to SS date).
Some states do not accept college student ID (although universities accept enrollment only with birth certificate). But gun related ID's are fine.
Some states in theory accept student ID's - BUT they make requirements that NO college in their state currently meets
Bingo !
For instance it is not enough that the ID is currently valid, it must only expire in xx years. No college will issue ID's for that long, I guess it is for the year of enrollment and one year after maybe, to make it practical.
College students often do not yet drive and may not travel internationally (money !) And they are much more likely to vote Democrat. So Republican want to make it HARD for THEM to vote.
Bingo ! By setting up a standard for college issued ID that NO college in the state (or in the whole U.S.) meets they are setting up a major road block. it is not impossible to get ID, but can be challenging in many cases. That can be some deviation in birth certificate. Or simple the effort (time, money, transportaiton) needed to get something that is ONLY needed for voting.
It makes it an uphill battle for busy folks (or people that do not drive (anymore).
It excludes the fence-sitters, that decide a few days before the election in other nations (or even on election day): I will participate after all in the election. In other countries the citizens CAN be spontantanuous. They saw a debate, they had a discussion, they took time to check out all the candidates short term, .....
Elderly "home bodies" typically living in a rural area, will have some form of ID once in their life (for instance a driver's licence that has expired), and in any other nation they would be fine, except for international travel.
I remember however that NV had a lot of problems with the "Real ID" that is required to get even on a domestic flight or being allowed in federal buildings ! Extremely long waiting lines at the DMV, a bureaucratic nightmare, many hoops for citizens to jump through, veterans that had participated in elections etc for many years were denied Real ID, etc, etc.
For instance if back in the day the computer program (patched togeither by one state !) did not allow enough space for long names, the civil servants may have been tempted to abreviate a middle name, while it is long in the birth certificate. There you go ! Major, major obstacle now. And not even common sense proof (Yes, it is really me, I did not steal all the documents or forge them, and the small deviation does not mean there is another person with the same birth date as me, it means the (overwhelming) logical conclusion. A civil servant made a small mistake or took small liberties in the past with how to issue a document.
NO REGISTRATION in other nations at all - not with or without ID, that is done automatically. If a person announced their move correctly (or lives with the parents at age 18 still) they will be automatically on the voter roll it a close and convenient polling station.
2
-
Convenient civil services and voting (on Sundays) in OTHER nations.
I used to live in a small village in Europe with not even 1,300 residents (so I know how their "admin" and voting works). And in 10 minutes driving distance other villages of the same size.
All these tiny muncipalities have their own civil services where people can update their data (residency when moving in, they are automatically removed from their old place at least as main residency)
Or to enter children that are born, or announce the death of a relative. And those places have their own polling stations - to be sure they will only have open on half the sunday / holiday (after church till noon).
Or people get their mail ballot (also from that small place).
The center of gravity in the region (hospital, public pool, full time childcare, many more shops, employers, more civil services (like driver's licence issuing, the equivalent of the DMV, admin for businesses), highschools, doctors that are specialists ..... was also a 10 minute drive in one direction. Now in the "central town" of the area (in that case 4,900 residents), the civil services are open 9 to 5 and they also have the long afternoon that is the norm everywhere.
The U.S. has long lines for the DMV - that is unheard of in other developed nations.
No ID on election day in the village (that is legal, if half the election board knows the person - that would also apply in cities). And it was easy to update residency data, that village had it's own mayor and admin, but these were part time jobs of course. But every civil service has one day with morning service and one day with a long afternoon/evening.
The villages usually have a lot of farmers, but the long days help those with a job, or only one car in the family and wife has to wait for the husband to come home, if she needs services.
Driver's licence issued 50 years ago, passport that expired 10 years ago, every retired person gets an ID that entitles them to some perks (half the costs in mass transportation, museums, ...) all of that counts as proper ID for voting (IF it even has to be shown).
The "ID requirement" is such a low burden that it does not hinder 80 - 85 % turnout (in high profile elections, if the voters think something is at stake they will vote in such numbers. Usually they have at LEAST 5 parties, and with popular vote no vote is "wasted". A new party has been formed ? If they have more than 5 % of the vote they get seats in the parliament, and federal funding. That is a threshold that is easier to clear, that is why citizens have CHOICE in other nations. The D and R party would be 2 parties each, plus the Greens, and maybe some libertarians, or digital pirates etc.
2
-
IDs (when voting in person. - Not for voting with absentee ballot. And voter registration is automatic in other countries) would only prevent voter IMPERSONATION. That however is extremely rare, it is a combination of factors that makes is even more rare and unlikely than other incidents of voters cheating (the most "common" is that a voter uses absentee ballot and then votes in person. the few idiots that do that. I know of 2 cases - Trump voters - in 2016, but have not ever heard of someone voting in the name of another person and doing so at a polling station.
And for inventing a person and forging all documents, that is so much hassle that I cannot imagine that someone would do that just to have one more vote. The FBI can "invent" identites for witness protection programs and I assume the mob can get forged documents for high profile criminals. But having flawless documentation (consistent, that is birth certificate, SS data, a history of employment, having gotten driver's licences in the past) is not easy and no criminal would use it in an imprudent manner, when it is not necessary. Every use also carries the potential of exposure.
I assume FBI and CIA have an advantage because they CAN work with the other agencies and get ALL the little details right, so the person they protect with a fake identity will have a completely plausible and convincing "history".
What prevents almost all voter fraud and even more so voter impersonation ?
1) sense of civic duty among citizens
2) those that do not have integrity fear the legal trouble, only morons would be unaware of it
3) the "reward" is one more vote. That does not change the outcome not even in swing states.
High risk and being unethical meets no personal and tangible reward. And most people understand the concept of Swing States. Versus solidly red or blue states. In TX or CA it does not really matter if a person votes R or D - it would often need more than 50,000 even 100,000 people to vote D or R to change the outcome.
In AZ and GA which were extremely close swing states in 2020 - 10,500 resp. 12,000 votes made the difference. But there is no evidence that there was even ONE case of voter impersonation. And if a person voted double - also very rare, almost impossible to do it and not be detected later **- we are talking 10 - 100 cheaters at most. If we go wild with the worst case assumptions. Among millions of votes cast.
** a person might get away on elction day, but they compare the data later. Then the ballot might in some cases end up in the pool of counted votes. BUT it would make the news ! so we would know there were some (very rare) instance. But it is not even that !
4) you almost have to know the person you want to IMPERSONATE. People shy away from that even more than they shy away from cheating with their vote in general (they have to get the polling station and the name and birth date and residency right. AND if the legitimate voter already voted they will be busted. If the legit voters comes after them, they likely willhave to defend themselves. BUT will be cleared AND in that case the ballot will be in the pool. BUT it will be also KNOWN that there was ONE CASE.
And in many cases the states also demand a the signature. Always on the mail ballot and even when voting in person - for instance in Florida).
Some dumb Trump voters tried to vote twice. But: a) they got busted and b) a voter ID did not hinder them nor did the ID help to bust them * They voted under their real name !
The states kept their files in order. THAT got them busted. And the 2 idiots I know of that tried in 2016 are the VERY rare exceptions that prove the rule. (and even they did not try to impersonate another person, they tried to inflate their vote, but not seize ! the vote of others).
Because if there would be more like them - they would also have been found, at least in those states or counties.
The voter of every mail ballot that is added to the ballots to be counted (after arrival), is crossed out when it is processed ("has voted"). many states compare signatures. so the registered and the current signature have to match. That means you defintely need to know the person so well that you can get your hands on paperwork with their signature.
And the same happens when they vote in person (For instance in Florida you have to sign, that creates problems because the paper and ink signature often looks a little different than when you sign on a pad. The pad makes the automatic comparsion FAST - but it also gives a warning although the person signs correctly. That can the the different tech, or the person has health problems and their signature changed a little).
I think in most states a person can surrender the absentee ballot they demanded before (incl. the envelopes !) - and then on and only then they can vote in person. So absentee ballot was a backup, or their schedule changed.
*
Most people that would even be craven AND dumb enough to consider cheating by voting twice (which again a voter ID does not help against, because they do it under their own name) - shy away from doing that in person.
The double Trump voters (I know of two in 2016) both tried absentee ballot and then voting in person. The woman in ? Wisconsin or Illinois in 2016 tried a polling station that was set up as alternative. Not her usual one. That is interesting: Psychologically she did not even want to risk meeting people that might know her. (they would not know that she already used mail ballot, but the dummies function at that level. She did not feel completely comfortable with voting twice from a morale standpoint despite her delusion that "Democrats do it all the time, so I can do it too in order to compensate for their cheating".
*
Other countries register their voters automatically out of a central UNIFORM register of residency that is updated (but in an uniform and coherent manner !) at the local level.
The local authorities print the invitation to vote or non-nationals registering, but no person in their right mind would do that either *). A combination of factors make the cases (where ID could even prevent fraud) EXTREMELY RARE anyway. Plus it can be a considerable burden in the U.S. (but not in all other wealthy nations !) to get a correct birth certificate. which is the starting point. Heaven help you if your birth certificate is slightly different than you current driver's licence or SS data.
Women that took the name of their husband (or got divorced).
People of Color in the South that were often born at home some 50, 60 years ago.
They did not vote then and did not count as citizen so very little attention was given to their legal documents - to issue them in a meticulous manner (as was proper for white persons). Or there were local customs of what meticulous meant.
So one hyphen missing, one letter changed, .... heaven help you if the middle name is abbreviated in later documents and is in long form in the birth certificate. In some states (especially if you move to another state) you better get a lawyer.
Now there are for instance several Robert Browns in the country (330 million people after all) and it is even possible that a name sake would happen to have the same birth date. But what are the odds that one of them also figures out the CORRECT place where the name sake is registered to vote.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
closing polling stations and long waiting lines for some demographics are the most effective tools of voter suppression. Republicans have excelled in the death-by-a-thousand-cuts strategies - and if voters embrace vote by mail, all of that is undone.
Followed by making it really complicated to get proper ID. The affluent, those that travel or drive a car have to deal with the red tape. But even they can be better off, one can STRATEGICALLY defund the services in SOME areas. So DMV for the suburbs and DMV for the rural part of Georgia may not be the same. A farmer or homeowner does not move as often as a tenant, so they do not have the hassle that often.
To make things worse (for Republicans) a lot of citizens have now used vote by mial for the first time because of the pandemic, and turnout was high (for U.S. standards, the 100 year record of almost 68 % would be lame for an important election elsewhere).
U.S. voteres that had to deal with 20, 30, 60, 90 minutes wait time might get used to the ease, and turnout might get higher even !
Also: chances increase that people check out candidates. Especially down ballot or ballot measures they did not even know where up for a vote this season.
That increases chances for outsiders, and for ballot measures.
If a LOT of people use mail ballot, then the wait times for those that sat on the fence but decided to vote in person spontanuously (so no time to demand the absentee ballot) might also be reduced. Kind of like: when many people work from home and retail is closed down because of the pandemic - those that still had to go to work had at least a faster commute, traffic was reduced.
Sure there would be a narrower window of time for in person voting. Mail voting is cheaper for the government, especially in rural areas. So they will not handle the costs of that AND have a lot of polling stations open for longer periods of time.
Even a busy low income person (or in bad health, or no car !) could vote with the same ease as an affluent white person of the suburbs.
That means those voters (disabled, low income, young students) may have more impact on policies in the future. European politicians are not better humans BUT if high profile elections have 80 - 85 % turnout you cannot simply abandon (low income) voters like the U.S. did regarding the pandemic.
There will be an electoral price to pay. They also could not outsource to the degree like the U.S.did, they kept more of their (qualtiy) manufacturing. consumer protection is much stronger, much better public services, etc.
The people that stand to profit from public services, a safety net, or blue collar manufacturing jobs - are underrepresented in the votes that are cast in the U.S. - It shows !
And Republicans would like to keep it that way.
Even more so than Corporate Democrats ! Higher turnout also helps Progressives to win over the big donor financed candidates that they prefer - and for the longest time establishment Dems did not want the low income folks to vote in primaries, and they used the same tactics as Repubs use in the general.
If Democrats now push for mail vote in the general, it will be hard to deny that to voters in the primaries. Except when it is a caucus (which is in person). or for NY to justify that one has to be registered as Democrat 6 months before the primary. Which of course helps the candidates pushed by the party and their buddies from Corporate media. 6 months before voters did not even bother with Sanders or Cynthia Nixon.
One reason why Joe Crowley was surprised by AOC. She started her campaign soon enough and many of the voters were already registered as Democrats, but they only voted in the general. And I am sure they told young voters to sign up. Which admitted is not hard in NYC because it is a blue state. Registering to vote made hard is a Republican speciality.
It means the people that always vote Democrat and always vote in primaries will make the most impact. People that got excited by an outsider candidate that only recently got some traction - let' say in the last 4 months - which is an eternity in elections. Sorry, you should have known half a year earlier that you might be interested to participate in this primary. or if Independents show interest in a candidate in the D primaries.
But now the Repubs have gone off to the deep end, so now even neoliberal Democrats can be bothered to fight - a little bit - for the reforms they should have fought for decades ago.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
there is a perverse incentive that both parties will find easily bipartisan agreement if it helps the common ! donors. Policies that the voters do not like: war, military spending, Patriot act, trade deals. As it is unpopular both parties move quietly, fast and discreetly, corporate media helps by reporting fleetingly if at all.
Republicans will be on board: 1) they have the same big donors as Democrats (at least the industries) 2) the Democrats cannot brag with what they passed, it is not popular, it will not help them win the next midterms or presidential election.
if a policy is popular and good for the people it will be incredibly difficult to pass it, the other party has way too much incentive to water it down, derail it, block it.
2
-
1
-
The R's (and also right wing radio shows, or Fox) wil gladly and cynically stoke the flames if it helps them. In a nation of 330 millions you have a few unhinged persons. Rile up the base and most will not resort to crime just run their mouth and be on social media - but a FEW will latch on to it.
This insurrection did however also attract and engage people that like to think of themselves as "law abiding" and rational, gainfully employed persons.
It was all fun and games on January 6th, 2021 - but now many of them are coherent enough to have second thoughts. FBI investigating, family is upset, legal costs, losing the job.
One Trump supporter was sobbing at the airport because he was put on the no-fly list for terrorists. good luck with returning to his state. he probably loses the ticket price and has to arrange for a vehicle. Or take a greyhound bus. Good luck also with explaining the longer leave of absence to your employer (I had booked a flight but I was put on the terrorist no flight list. Even if he lies about a family emergency - which is hard to pull off in smaller communities - chances are it will come up because of Social media).
The potential lunatics and fanatics that take the cycnical self serving propaganda too seriously are much more heavily armed than in other nations, or it is very easy to get your hands on firearms. Legally and illegally.
If one breaks into a house - there is a good chance there will be a weapon. Try that in France or Germany (even rural areas), chances are slim a burglar would be able to steal a firearm - there is none. Only if they already know that the owner hunts (and even then it will be "only" a hunting rifle. no semi automatic, no AR15 style weapon).
Any deranged person will have to do attacks, assassinations, taking a poltician hostage, and what not ... in other ways. Even if they plan to drive a car into a crowd. That takes some waiting, and they are also not swept along with a crowd that had just been riled up by the sitting president.
No, they have to wait and plan, and get some things right. It takes time and they have to be secretive about it.
It is easier to limit the number of casualties even IF a person goes through. There will be also fewer such incidents - the higher demand on planning and sneakyness and criminal energy throws most off track.
Either they are found out or they give up on it midway.
It is certainly possible to get an illegal weapon in other nations, it is just much harder and you have to know criminals.
So the regular person "losing it", or with severe mental illness (and that has gotten worse) does not have the assault rifle waiting at home. They would have to put in a lot of effort. If they are deranged they are usually not coherent and systematic enough. If they do have some planning capacities - they have time to get some steam out off the system and think about it. Second thoughts can deter even crazy delusional people from doing crazy stuff.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Incumbent Democrat Brewster won by 69 votes (on a side note, why the hell did he not win with a better margin ! as incumbent !). They counted in some counties votes where the voters had forgotten to write the date on the outer envelope BUT the ballot had arrrived IN TIME. - Yep, Republicans would discard such ballots, and likely did so in other counties (but they handled it equally for all voters THERE).
If they would not count, his challenger would have won by 24 votes. So SOME Republican voters made the same mistake.
A judge confirmed that it is O.K. to count those votes, the election has been certified.
I heard there is a clause in PA constitution that the loser has to "concede". Well, that is a stupid rule. The will of the people, the count, and the legal requirements determine if a candidate has won, it does not matter if their competitor is gracious about it or not.
Besides: let's say the loser had a severe accident and is in a medically induced coma ... what then.
Mindy you - if someone forgot a more relevant detail like the signature they most likely did not count such ballots.
Republicans sued on ground of "equal protection clause". When I think of it - they only have be super petty in ONE polling station to later have a PRETEXT to sue IF it would help. Keeping some back doors open so to speek.
It is of course possible that some counties were really petty about it out of conviction, while others weren't. (Especially if they think it is going to hurt a certain demographic. Republican voters were discouraged to vote by mail, and that mistake cannot happen to an in-person voter).
Well no one hinders the R's to accept the discernible will of the voters in the future and accept things with minor inconsequential technical flaws (the ballots ARRIVED in time).
If they have been petty in areas where they dominate - they can be more generous and acting in the spirit of the voter will next time. In 2 years they got their chance to do better.
1
-
1
-
1
-
If Trump had handled the pandemic better (Dr. Fauci would have been a valuable asset for Trump's public image) and if Trump would have dragged Congress and Senate in summer for a better stimulus package (whether they passed it or not) - he would have won this election, certainly the EC and with better results than in 2016. As is: there were 4 states that Biden won with a total of 125,000 votes (WI, PA, AZ, and GA - the result was so close that it needed DAYS of counting until Biden was declared president elect by ALL networks).
And Biden needed at least 2 out of the 4 states to win the EC (in any comibination, the two states with the lowest number of electors would have put Biden just over the 270 margin. But not even PA alone would have been enough). So de facto - with more than 160 million votes cast, it came down to a few ten thousand votes in 2 states.
That is way too close for comfort.
In 2016 it was a comparable scenario, then favoring Trump. He won 3 states with a total of 70,000 votes. And he needed at least 1 of the 3 (MI, PA or WI) to get at least 270 electors. If HRC had won all of the 3 states she would have had 273 electors, and she would have pulled off a narrow win. But she would have needed all 3.
And aside from 2 out of these 4 states (PA, WI, GA and AZ) - Biden should also have pulled off NV and MI with more convincing margins, he needed those two states as well - at least they were not such nailbaiters.
AZ and GA were pleasant surprises but if NV, MI, PA and WI would have been solid 3 - 5 % margin wins ** - that shows in the polling before the election and it manifests early on in the ongoing count of mail ballots.
** the polls showed such margins but as we know now they overestimated the lead of Biden. "Shy Trump supporters" seem to be a thing (people that will not admit to the pollsters that they prefer Trump). So with a result of 3 - 5 % the polls would have shown Biden with a lead of 8 - 10 % before election day and the Republicans would have prepared for defeat.
And these 4 states (NV, WI, PA and MI) should be solidly blue - especially after 4 years of Trump and considering the state of the economy and his inept pandemic handling.
The networks (incl. FOX) would have declared Biden the winner on the evening of Nov. 4th (because his lead in the ongoing mail vote count allowed a safe projection) - thus not giving Trump and the other morons / grifters the chance to spin the narrative of "election fraud".
The goal was to have a convincing, fast and decisive win to defeat Trumpism - that did not happen.
Well, maybe it was a blessing in disguise because the Trump cultists and the Republicans showed their colors in the aftermath. But it does not bode well for the future !
Where does that leave Democrats regarding the midterms 2022 or the next presidential election in 2024 ?
They could hardly pull off MI, PA and WI in 2020 ?? (If Trump did win a state - he won it with a solid margin. He won Ohio ! two times with 8 % margin, improved his result in Florida from 1.2 to over 3 % etc.)
AZ and GA may not be in play in 2024 if Republicans have a better candidate. So it comes down to the Rustbelt States and the Dems can hardly win them with Trump in charge ?? Holy shit !
Biden did not win - Trump, the idiot snatched defeat from the jaws of victory.
Corporate Dems and the Biden campaign in a very cynical manner risked losing by running only on "Trump bad" instead of running on economic populism and M4A, and it only worked out because Trump is that bad and the grifters around Trump are all idiots (or were fighting each other).
1
-
1
-
Biden ran ONLY on "Trump bad" - and they risked in a very cavalier manner to give Trump another term. Either Biden or Trump could have won this in a solid manner (with a good pandemic response and economic populism) and w/o any delay and nail biter. if Biden had won MI, and PA with a 3 - 5 % margin that would manifest in polling, in exit polling (even if Republicans vote more in person) and also in the results right on the next day as they started counting the mail ballots.
Also: some states only allow the mail ballots to be counted after the election is over, but some do allow the earlier processing. Very high turnout (not the measly 65 or 68 % that set a 100 year record - in the U.S. in any other country it would have been 85 %) and lots of votes for Democrats would have sent a signal. They are not allowed to report publicly but of course the party leadership and the campaigns and media get some inofficial heads up.
Instead Biden SLOWLY overtook Trump, it took several days of counting to eek out a small lead, and NV and MI were not decided right away either. the win in NV and MI was more solid, they soon had over 1 % - but the margin should have been higher in these states too.
If Trump did win a state - he won them with solid and often improved margin compared to 2016.
The votes slowly putting Biden over the line is O.K. in AZ and GA that are purple at best - but MI, NV - and WI and PA should be a slamn dunk. The are / should be / used to be blue strongholds.
Remember when Ohio was won by Obama TWICE ? Last time in 2012. In 2016 and 2020 it went to Trump with EIGHT PERCENT margin. That is how bad the Democratic party treats their working class base (selling them out on behalf of the big donors).
Remember when Tennessee was solidly in the blue camp (with father and later son Gore being Senators. Until 2000 when the long time Senator of TN and 2 terms VP could not even get the support of his home state to become president. No Gore did not lose in Florida - with TN going to him Florida would have been an unsuccessful attempt of Repubs).
West Virginia must have been Democrat at some point.
Obama also won North Carolina in 2008 - but not in 2012 if I remember correctly.
The prize in 2012 was Ohio, and he pulled it off, and after that Fox called the election for Obama.
Everyone assumed that Harry Truman in 1948 would lose against the Republican that was not shy to badmouth the New Deal. Well the Mid West had gotten a lot of help under FDR. Truman seemed to have lost narrowly on election night and all had predicted his loss - but as the vote reporting from the Midwest trickled in, he did better and better. Until he ended up having a solid win. Back in the day Republicans were not the ruthless, cynical actors they did not insinuate that Democrats had cheated with the ballots of the white farmers in the midwest. I guess they always took longer to get the exact numbers from there, they had just made projections that were wrong and the polling was not representative.
after all before that election FDR had won 4 terms (races in 1932, 1936, 1940 and 1944) and the pollsters did not have to show sophistication in their trade to predict FDR winning.
The long delay after Nov. 3 2021 ALLOWED for a narrative. and Trump and Republicans seized their chance. They always do. a fairly decisive margin in the battleground states - they would have mourned, and shut up.
Biden could not decisively and early on make clear that he would win - and that means they missed out on a SOLID rebuttal of Trumpism.
They eeked out a win with a historically inept president and during a pandemic that was badly handled and also caused a recession / depression. That is how intentionally weak the Dems are. They cannot use a platform that would fire up their base and typical non-voters. _The big donors that also finance Republicans do not allow them a winning strategy. They have to try to "just" pull if off while giving the base nothing).
The nation had enough of Cheney / GWB - but the aspiring first black president felt he had to give the masses something. even though he sold out the base (already in 2008, they played nice with the big donors, but that was behind closed doors) - Obama run on "Hope and Change", he realized that he needed to win convincingly and that was the way to do it. With (fake) economic populism. Not a new textbook either - see FDR and post WW2.
The party realizes that the voters have wisened up, especially young people cannot be fooled as easily as in 2008, now they compare the voting record on the internet and follow the actions (not rhetoric) of a politician. Obama got a pass for being a neoliberal Republican Lite - Biden would not get it (voters more savyy and he is not a cool young black president). So they do not even try - then the base cannot insist later on them holding their promises.
The Dems RISKED another Trump win, never mind the talk about how Trump. Must. Be. Defeated - that is only to make the base fall in line when Corporate Dems cynically give them nothing to VOTE FOR.
Biden could have won in a landslide.
Trump too could have pulled off a decisive win (at least in the EC). A more rational pandemic response and some economic populism. That is the scary thing, if Trump would not be such an idiot he would look forward to his second term. The next Trump will be more competent - and what are the Dems going to do then ?
Trump won 3 states with only 70,000 votes in total in 2016, and I think he needed at least 2 of the 3. This time Biden pulled off the win in the EC with 4 states, and he needed at least 2 of them in any combination (and he won them with a total of only 125,000 votes. AZ, GA, PA and WI). PAand WI should not even be close !
Ohio ! was an 8 % win for Trump in 2016 and in 2020.
Florida: 1.2 % in 2016 but over 3 % in 2020.
1
-
1
-
1